US5971583A  Method and apparatus for defining surfaces of threedimensional object from threedimensional wireframe model  Google Patents
Method and apparatus for defining surfaces of threedimensional object from threedimensional wireframe model Download PDFInfo
 Publication number
 US5971583A US5971583A US08904427 US90442797A US5971583A US 5971583 A US5971583 A US 5971583A US 08904427 US08904427 US 08904427 US 90442797 A US90442797 A US 90442797A US 5971583 A US5971583 A US 5971583A
 Authority
 US
 Grant status
 Grant
 Patent type
 Prior art keywords
 edges
 closed
 defining
 edge
 step
 Prior art date
 Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
 Expired  Fee Related
Links
Images
Classifications

 G—PHYSICS
 G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING; COUNTING
 G06T—IMAGE DATA PROCESSING OR GENERATION, IN GENERAL
 G06T17/00—Three dimensional [3D] modelling, e.g. data description of 3D objects
 G06T17/20—Finite element generation, e.g. wireframe surface description, tesselation
Abstract
Description
The present application is based on Japanese Patent Application No. 8201708 filed Jul. 31, 1997, the content of which is incorporated hereinto by reference.
1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates to a method and an apparatus for efficiently defining surfaces of a threedimensional object from a threedimensional wireframe model as in a threedimensional modeling system using a computer, such as computeraided design (CAD) and computeraided manufacturing (CAM).
2. Discussion of the Related Art
A CAD or CAM system as disclosed in JPA62251965 is adapted to newly design or redesign parts or products having a certain shape, by using wireframe models which are relatively simple in data construction. In such a CAD or CAM system, the wireframe models are automatically processed into desired solid models. While such wireframe models enable a human being to imagine threedimensional objects, each wireframe model is nothing but a group of edges (segments), namely, consists of a list of coordinate values of vertices (apices) in a threedimensional coordinate system, and a list of the edges or segments each connecting the adjacent vertices. Therefore, suitable processing of the wireframe models is required to erase hidden lines, to obtain volumes or weights of the objects, or to convert them into solid models. The processing includes definition of a plurality of surfaces or faces which collectively define each threedimensional object.
For defining the surfaces of an object from a threedimensional wireframe model, each of the edges is checked to determine whether this edge cooperates with any other edges connected thereto to define a closed loop. Each closed loop is defined or determined as a surface of the threedimensional object corresponding to the wireframe models.
To effect the above determination as to whether the closed loops are defined, multiple edges connected to each edge in question are sequentially pointed for the determination. Accordingly, the computer of the system requires a considerably long processing time for defining the surfaces from the wireframe models. This is a drawback of the conventional system.
It is therefore a first object of the present invention to provide a method by which the surfaces of a threedimensional object can be efficiently defined from a threedimensional wireframe model.
It is a second object of the invention to provide an apparatus suitable for practicing the method of the invention.
The first object indicated above may be achieved according to a first aspect of this invention, which provides a method of defining surfaces of a threedimensional object on the basis of a threedimensional wireframe model, using a computer, wherein the method includes an edge pair pointing step of sequentially pointing a plurality of pairs of edges selected from edges which constitute the threedimensional wireframe model, each of the pairs of edges consisting of two edges lying on the same plane, a candidate edge determining step of determining a group of candidate edges consisting of the edges of a currently pointed one of the plurality of pairs and at least one edge which lies on the same plane as the edges of the currently pointed one of the plurality of pairs, a closedloop edge set determining step of determining, as a set of closedloop defining edges, those ones of the candidate edges of the group which cooperate to define a closed loop, and a surface defining step of defining a surface of the threedimensional object, on the basis of the set of closedloop defining edges.
In the computeraided surface defining method of the present invention described above, the edge pair pointing step is formulated to sequentially point the pairs of edges, each pair consisting of two edges lying on the same one plane, and the candidate edge determining step is formulated to determine groups of candidate edges, each group consisting of the edges of the currently pointed pair and at least one edge lying on the same plane as the edges of the currently pointed pair. Further, the closedloop edge set determining step is formulated to determine a set of closedloop defining edges, which consist of those candidate edges of the group under examination which cooperate with each other to define a closed loop. The surface defining step is formulated to define the surfaces of the threedimensional object on the basis of the respective sets of closedloop defining edges determined on the basis of the respective groups of candidate edges. In the present method, the determination as to whether the edges define a closed loop is effected for each group of candidate edges. Since all of the candidate edges including the currently selected pair of edges lie on the same plane, the number of the edges for which the determination is effected for each edge of the wireframe model is considerably smaller than the number of edges for which similar determination is conventionally effected for each edge. In the conventional method, the determination for each edge is effected for all of the other edges. Accordingly, the efficiency of surface definition on the basis of the threedimensional wireframe model according to the present invention is significantly improved.
In one preferred form of the method of this invention, the edge pair pointing step comprises sequentially pointing the plurality of pairs of edges, each pair consisting of two mutually connected edges lying on the same plane. Since the two edges of the pointed pair necessarily lie on the same plane, it is not necessary to effect a step of determining whether the two edges which are not connected to each other lie on the same plane or not.
In another preferred form of the method, the threedimensional wireframe model includes coordinate values, in a threedimensional coordinate system, of each of two vertices defining each of the edges of the threedimensional wireframe model, and the surface defining step comprises preparing a list of surfaces wherein each of the surfaces is represented by the set of closedloop defining edges each defined by the two vertices whose coordinate values are known.
The second object indicated above may be achieved according to a second aspect of the present invention, which provides a computeraided apparatus for defining surfaces of a threedimensional object on the basis of a threedimensional wireframe model, wherein the apparatus includes edge pair pointing means for sequentially pointing a plurality of pairs of edges selected from edges which constitute the threedimensional wireframe model, each of the pairs of edges consisting of two edges lying on the same plane, candidate edge determining means for determining a group of candidate edges consisting of the edges of a currently pointed one of the plurality of pairs and at least one edge which lies on the same plane as the edges of the currently pointed one of the plurality of pairs, closedloop edge set determining means for determining, as a set of closedloop defining edges, those ones of the candidate edges of the group which cooperate to define a closed loop, and surface defining means for defining a surface of the threedimensional object, on the basis of the set of closedloop defining edges.
In the computeraided surface defining apparatus of the present invention described above, the edge pair pointing means is adapted to sequentially point the pairs of edges, each pair consisting of two edges lying on the same one plane, and the candidate edge determining means is adapted to determine groups of candidate edges, each group consisting of the edges of the currently pointed pair and at least one edge lying on the same plane as the edges of the currently pointed pair. Further, the closedloop edge set determining means is adapted to determine a set of closedloop defining edges, which consist of those candidate edges of the group under examination which cooperate with each other to define a closed loop. The surface defining means is adapted to define the surfaces of the threedimensional object on the basis of the respective sets of closedloop defining edges determined on the basis of the respective groups of candidate edges. In the present computeraided apparatus, the determination as to whether the edges define a closed loop is effected for each group of candidate edges. Since all of the candidate edges including the currently selected pair of edges lie on the same plane, the number of the edges for which the determination is effected for each edge of the wireframe model is considerably smaller than the number of edges for which similar determination is conventionally effected for each edge. In the conventional method, the determination for each edge is effected for all of the other edges. Accordingly, the efficiency of surface definition on the basis of the threedimensional wireframe model according to the present invention is significantly improved.
In one preferred form of the apparatus of the invention, the edge pair pointing means comprises means for sequentially pointing the plurality of pairs of edges, each pair consisting of two mutually connected edges lying on the same plane.
In another preferred form of the apparatus, the threedimensional wireframe model includes coordinate values, in a threedimensional coordinate system, of each of two vertices defining each of the edges of the threedimensional wireframe model, and the surface defining step comprises preparing a list of surfaces wherein each of the surfaces is represented by the set of closedloop defining edges each defined by the two vertices whose coordinate values are known.
The above and optional objects, features, advantages and technical and industrial significance of this invention will be better understood by reading the following detailed description of a presently preferred embodiment of the invention, when considered in connection with the accompanying drawings, in which:
FIG. 1 is a block diagram illustrating a CAD system constructed according to one embodiment of the present invention;
FIG. 2 is a block diagram illustrating functional means of a central processing unit of the CAD system of FIG. 1, together with the content of a primary storage devices;
FIG. 3 is a view showing one example of a threedimensional wireframe model from which surfaces of the corresponding object are automatically defined by the central processing unit;
FIG. 4 is a flow chart illustrating a routine executed by the central processing unit to automatically define the surfaces of the solid object;
FIG. 5 is a flow chart illustrating a closedloop determining subroutine executed in step SA6 of the routine of FIG. 4; and
FIG. 6 is a flow chart illustrating a smallest loop determining subroutine executed in step SA9 of the routine of FIG. 4.
Referring first to the block diagram of FIG. 1, a computeraided design (CAD) system 10 includes a central processing unit 12, a primary storage device 14 incorporating a randomaccess memory (RAM) and a readonly memory (ROM), and an expandable auxiliary storage device 16 such as a hard disc device, an MO storage and a tape storage. The central processing unit 12 operates to perform various operations according to control programs stored in the primary storage device 14, while utilizing a temporary data storage function of the primary storage device 14 and auxiliary storage device 16. The operations performed by the central processing unit 12 include: operations to generate or modify threedimensional wireframe models; operations to define the surfaces of threedimensional objects from the threedimensional wireframe models; operations to generate, expand, contract, modify, translate and rotate solid models on the basis of the threedimensional wireframe models whose surfaces have been defined; operations to obtain a sum (a union set), a difference (a difference set) or a product (an intersection set) of threedimensional models; and operations to define cross sectional shapes of desired portions of threedimensional models.
The CAD system 10 further includes a display device 18 such as a cathode ray tube (CRT) or a liquid crystal display (LCD) panel, a keyboard 20, a tablet 22, and a dial 24. The display device 18 is adapted to provide visual representation of images such as the threedimensional models, and operation menu which permits the operator of the system to easily select desired operations to be performed. The keyboard 20, tablet 22 and dial 24 function as a data input device through which the operator enters appropriate data necessary to generate threedimensional models, and numerical control (NC) data for moving the threedimensional models. The data input device is also used for commanding the system to perform the operations to expand, contract, modify, move or rotate the threedimensional models, to obtain the sum, difference or product of the threedimensional models, and to select the desired operation through the menu provided on the display device 18.
The CAD system is equipped with a printer 26, a paper tape puncher 28, and a network controller 30. The printer 26 is capable of printing NC data, and other data as displayed on the display device 18 or obtained by the central processing unit 12. The paper tape puncher 28 is provided to prepare NC tapes used by machine tools for machining operations. The network controller 30 is connected to a work station or machine tools for data communications therebetween.
Referring to the block diagram of FIG. 2, there are illustrated functional means of the central processing unit 12 which are provided to automatically define the surfaces of threedimensional objects on the basis of threedimensional wireframe models while these wireframe models are stored in the primary storage device 14. As shown in FIG. 2, each threedimensional wireframe model for which the surfaces are defined includes a list of the coordinate values of each vertex (apex) P, and a list of edges (segments) L each of which is defined by adjacent two vertices. Where the threedimensional wireframe model is a cube 32 as shown in FIG. 3, by way of example, the list of the vertices P and the list of the edges L are as indicated in TABLES 1 and 2 given below:
TABLE 1______________________________________ XCO YCO ZCOVERTEX NO. ORDINATE ORDINATE ORDINATE______________________________________No. 1 P1 x1 y1 z1No. 2 P2 x2 y2 z2No. 3 P3 x3 y3 z3No. 4 P4 x4 y4 z4No. 5 P5 x5 y5 z5No. 6 P6 x6 y6 z6No. 7 P7 x7 y7 z7No. 8 P8 x8 y8 z8______________________________________
TABLE 2______________________________________EDGE EDGENO. VERTEX NO. NO. VERTEX NO.______________________________________No. 1L1 P1, P2 No. 7 L7 P7, P8No. 2 L2 P2, P3 L8 P8, P5No. 3 L3 P3, P4 L9 P1, P5No. 4 L4 P4, P1 L10 P2, P6No. 5 L5 P5, P6 L11 P3, P7No. 6 L6 P6, P7 L12 P4, P8______________________________________
In TABLES 1 and 2, the vertices P are represented by the X, Y and Zcoordinate values x, y and z in the XYZ rectangular coordinate system, while each edge L is represented by the two vertices corresponding to its opposite ends (start and end points).
The central processing unit 12 includes edge pair pointing means 38, candidate edge determining means 40, closedloop edge set determining means 42 and surface defining means 44.
The edge pair pointing means 38 is adapted to sequentially point or designate pairs of edges selected from the edges constituting the threedimensional wireframe model, each pair consisting of two mutually connected edges lying on the same one plane. In the example of the cube 32 of FIG. 3, these pairs of mutually connected edges include, for instance: a pair of edges L1 and L2; a pair of edges L2 and L3; a pair of edges L2 and L11; a pair of edges L3 and L12; and a pair of edges L3 and L4.
The candidate edge determining means 40 is adapted to determine a group of candidate edges consisting of the two connected edges of the pair currently pointed by the edge pair pointing means 38, and at least one edge which lies on the same plane as the currently pointed pair of edges. Where the pair of connected edges L1 and L2 is pointed by the edge pair pointing means 38, for example, the candidate edge determining means 42 determines the edges L1, L2, L3 and L4 as a group of candidate edges, since the edges L3 and L4 lie on the same plane as the pointed pair of edges L1 and L2.
The closedloop edge set determining means 42 is adapted to determine whether the pair of edges currently pointed by the edge pair pointing means 38 cooperate with any of the other candidate edges determined by the candidate edge determining means 40, to define a closed loop, namely, a wire frame. In the case where the pair of connected edges L1 and L2 is pointed by the edge pair pointing means 38 and where the edges L1L4 are determined as the group of candidate edges by the candidate edge determining means 40, the closedloop edge set determining means 42 determines whether the edges L1 and L2 cooperate with the edge L3 and/or the edge L4, to define a closed loop. The closedloop edge set determining means 42 determines the edges defining each closed loop, as a set of closedloop defining edges, and stores this set of closedloop defining edges. Although the manner of determining whether the three or more edges define a closed loop is similar to the conventionally practiced manner, the present method of defining the surfaces of a threedimensional object on the basis of a threedimensional wireframe model is different from the conventional method in that the edges (referred to as "candidate edges") to be checked for the above determination by the closedloop edge set determining means 42 all lie on the same plane.
The surface defining means 44 is adapted to define a surface or face of the object corresponding to the threedimensional wireframe model, on the basis of each set of closedloop defining edges determined by the closedloop edge set determining means 44. Where the edges L1, L2, L3 and L4 are determined as a set of closedloop defining edges by the closedloop edge set determining means 42, for example, the surface defining means 44 prepares and stores data indicating that a surface S1 is defined by the four edges L1L4. The thus prepared data constitute a part of a list of surfaces wherein the surfaces are defined by respective sets of closedloop defining edges.
With repeated operations of the edge pair pointing means 38, candidate edge determining means 40, closedloop edge set determining means 42 and surface defining means 44, all of the surfaces defining the threedimensional object corresponding to the threedimensional wireframe model are defined, and the list of the surfaces is stored in the primary storage device 14, as indicated in FIG. 2. TABLE 3 given below shows the list of surfaces of the cube 32 of FIG. 3, which is an example of a threedimensional object that can be derived from a threedimensional wireframe model.
TABLE 3______________________________________SURFACE NO. EDGE NO.______________________________________No. 1 S1 L1, L2, L3, L4No. 2 S2 L3, L11, L7, L12No. 3 S3 L5, L8, L7, L6No. 4 S4 L1, L9, L5, L10No. 5 S5 L4, L12, L8, L9No. 6 S6 L2, L10, L6, L11______________________________________
The surface defining means 44 may incorporate smallest loop determining means 46, which is operated if two or more closed loops are determined by the closedloop edge set determining means 42. The smallest closed loop determining means 46 is adapted to determine or select a smallest one of the closed loops, so that the selected smallest closed loop is used for the surface definition by the surface defining means 44.
The central processing unit 12 is adapted to execute a surface defining routine illustrated in the flow chart of FIG. 4. This surface defining routine is initiated with step SA1 to read the edges (segments) L1Ln of the threedimensional wireframe model under examination. In the example of the wireframe model for the cube 32 of FIG. 3, the twelve edges L1 through L12 are read out from the edge list (indicated in TABLE 2) stored in the primary storage device 14.
Step SA1 is followed by step SA2 in which a pair of edges (e.g., L1 and L2) of the wireframe model is pointed. With repeated implementation of this step SA2, the different pairs of edges are sequentially pointed in a predetermined order. For instance, the edges L1 and L2 are initially pointed as the first pair of edges in step SA2.
Then, the control flow goes to step SA3 to determine whether the two edges of the pair pointed in step SA3 are connected to each other and lie on the same one plane. For instance, this determination is effected on the basis of the coordinate values x, y and z of the two vertices (apices) defining the opposite ends of each of the two edges of the currently pointed pair. If two or more pairs of connected edges exist on the same plane, only one of these pairs (e.g., only the first pair) is selected, and the other pair or pairs is/are discarded. While four pairs of connected edges (L1L2, L2L3, L3L4 and L1L4) exist on a plane including the edges L1 and L2, for example, only the pair of edges L1 and L2 is selected, for instance. It will be understood that steps SA2 and SA3 correspond to the edge pair pointing means 38 for sequentially pointing the pairs of mutually connected edges lying on the same plane.
If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SA3, the control flow goes to step SA5, while skipping step SA4. If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA3, the control flow goes to step SA4 corresponding to the candidate edge determining means 40 described above, to determine whether each of the edges read in step SA1 (all edges L1L12) of the wireframe model) lies on the same plane as the pointed point of connected edges. For instance, the edges L3 and L4 are determined to lie on the same plane as the currently pointed pair of connected edges L1 and L2, and these four edges are determined as a group G1 of candidate edges lying on the same plane.
Then, the control flow goes to step SA5 to determine whether steps SA2, SA3 and SA4 have been implemented for all of the pairs of edges. In other words, steps SA2SA4 are repeatedly implemented until an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA5. Thus, a plurality of groups Gi (i=1 through p) of candidate edges are determined corresponding to the respective pairs of mutually connected edges lying on the same plane. The candidate edge groups Gi determined by the candidate edge determining means 40 in step SA4 are stored.
When the affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA5, the control flow goes to step SA6 to point one of the candidate edge groups Gi and determine whether the currently pointed candidate edge group Gi includes edges which cooperate to define a closed loop. If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SA6, the control flow goes to step SA8 to determine whether steps SA6 and SA7 have been implemented for all of the candidate edge groups Gi (i=1 through p). If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SA8, the control flow goes back to step SA6. Thus, the candidate edge groups Gi are sequentially pointed, and the determination in step SA6 is effected for all of the candidate edge groups Gi.
The determination in step SA6 is effected according to a closedloop determining subroutine illustrated in the flow chart of FIG. 5. The subroutine is initiated with step SB1 to determine whether a currently pointed one of the candidate edges Li of the pointed candidate edge group Gi is connected at its end point to another candidate edge Li. If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SB1, the control flow goes to step SB8 to determine whether the determination has been effected for all of the candidate edges Li of the group Gi under examination. If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SB8, the control flow goes back to step SB1. Thus, the candidate edges of the group Gi under examination are sequentially pointed, and the determination in step SB1 is effected for all candidate edges Li of the group Gi under examination. If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SB1, the control flow goes to step SB2 to store the next candidate edge to which the end point of the candidate edge Li under examination is connected. Step SB2 is followed by step SB3 to determine whether the stored candidate edge is connected at its end point to another candidate edge of the group Gi. If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained, the control flow goes to step SB4 to store the next candidate edge to which the end point of the candidate edge is connected. Step SB4 is followed by step SB5 to determine whether the end point of the stored candidate edge is the same as the start point of the candidate edge for which the affirmative decision (YES) was obtained in step SB1. If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SB5, the control flow goes to step SB6 to determine whether the determination has been effected for all of the candidate edges Li of the group Gi under examination. Steps SB3SB5 are repeatedly implemented until an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SB5.
When the affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SB5, the control flow goes to step SB7 in which the candidate edges Li of the group Gi which have been determined to be connected end to end are determined as a set of closedloop defining edges. Step SB7 is followed by step SB8 to determine whether the determination has been effected for all candidate edges of the group Gi under examination. Thus, steps SB1SB7 are repeated for all of the candidate edges of the group Gi.
Referring back to the routine of FIG. 4, the control flow goes to step SA7 if an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA6. In step 7A, the determined set of closedloop defining edges is stored in the primary storage device 14. In the case of the candidate edge group G1 consisting of the candidate edges L1, L2, L3 and L4, all of the four candidate edges L1L4 cooperate with each other to define a closed loop, namely, a surface S1 of a threedimensional object corresponding to the threedimensional wireframe model in question. In this case, the four edges L1L4 are stored as a set of closedloop defining edges in relation to the surface S1, as part of the surface list, in the primary storage memory 14, as indicated in FIG. 2.
It will be understood that steps SA6 and SA7 correspond to the closedloop edge set determining means 42 for determining a set of closedloop defining edges which belong to the candidate edge group Gi and which lie on the same plane.
Step SA7 is followed by step SA8 indicated above, to determine whether steps SA6 and SA7 have been performed for all of the candidate edge groups Gi. Steps SA6 and SA7 are repeatedly implemented until an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA8.
When the affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SA8, the control flow goes to step SA9 corresponding to the smallest loop determining means 46, to determine the smallest one of the closed loops if these closed loops are defined by the candidate edges Li of the same group Gi. Namely, this step SA8 is implemented for each of the candidate edge groups Gi, whose candidate edges define two or more closed loops (number of the loops=n). The determination in step SA9 is effected for each of those candidate edge groups Gi, according to a smallest loop determining subroutine illustrated in the flow chart of FIG. 6.
The subroutine of FIG. 6 is initiated with step SC1 in which counters "a" and "b" are set at "1". The counters "a" and "b" correspond to the respective closed loops "a" and "b" which are defined by the candidate edges Li of the group Gi under examination. Step SC1 is followed by step SC2 to determine whether the two or more edges of the closed loop "a" are the same as the two or more edges of the closed loop "b". If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SC2, the control flow goes to step SC7 and the subsequent steps to increment the counters "a" and "b". If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SC2, the control flow goes to step SC3 to determine whether the number of the closed loop "a" is larger than the number of the closed loop "b". If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SC3, the control flow goes to step SC4 to discard the closed loop "a". If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SC3, the control flow goes to step SC5 to determine whether the number of the edges of the closed loop "a" is smaller than the number of the edges of the closed loop "b". If an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SC5, the control flow goes to step SC6 to discard the closed loop "b". If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SC5, the control flow goes to step SC7 to increment the counter "b".
Step SC7 is followed by step SC8 to determine whether the content of the counter "b" is equal to "n" which represents the number of the closed loops defined by the group Gi under examination. If a negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SC8, the control flow goes back to step SC2. Steps SC2SC7 are repeatedly implemented until an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained in step SC8. When the affirmative decision is obtained in step SC8, the control flow goes to step SC9 to increment the counter "a". Step SC8 is followed by step SC10 to determine whether the content of the counter "a" is equal to "n". If a negative decision (NO) is obtained steps SC2SC9 are repeatedly implemented until an affirmative decision (YES) is obtained. The subroutine of FIG. 6 is terminated when the affirmative decision is obtained in step SC10.
Referring back to the flow chart of FIG. 4, step SA9 is followed by step SA10 corresponding to the surface defining means 44, in which all of the surfaces Sn (e.g., surfaces S1 through S6) of the threedimensional object are defined by the respective sets of closedloop defining edges Li, and a list of the surfaces Sn is stored in the primary storage device 14, as indicated in TABLE 3 by way of example. In this example, the surface S1 is defined by the four edges L1, L2, L3 and L4, while the surface S2 is defined by the four edges L3, L11, L7 and L12, for instance. If two or more sets of closedloop defining edges exist for the same surface Sn, only one of these sets is stored, and the remainder is discarded.
In the present embodiment of the invention, which is applicable to the threedimensional wireframe model for the cube 32, for example, the edge pair pointing means 38 operates in steps SA2 and SA3 to sequentially point the pairs of edges, each pair consisting of two mutually connected edges which lie on the same plane. In step SA4, the candidate edge determining means 40 operates to determine groups Gi of candidate edges, each group Gi consisting of the currently pointed pair of mutually connected edges and one or more edges lying on the same plane as the pointed pair of edges. In steps SA6 and SA7, the closedloop edge set determining means 42 operates to determine sets of closedloop defining edges, each set consisting of the edges which define a closed loop on the plane of each group Gi under examination. In step SA10, the surface defining means 44 operates to define the surfaces on the basis of the respective sets of closedloop defining edges determined by the closedloop edge set determining means 42.
In the present embodiment, the determination as to whether the edges define a closed loop or wire frame is effected for each group Gi of candidate edges. Since all of the candidate edges of each group Gi including the currently pointed pair of connected edges lie on the same plane, the number of the edges for which the determination is effected for each edge of the wireframe model is considerably smaller than the number of edges for which similar determination is conventionally effected for each edge. In the conventional method, the determination for each edge is effected for all of the other edges. Accordingly, the efficiency of surface definition on the basis of the threedimensional wireframe model according to the present invention is significantly improved.
In the conventional method, too, a closedloop determining subroutine as illustrated in the flow chart of FIG. 5 is executed for determining the closed loops defining the surfaces of a threedimensional object, on the basis of the corresponding wireframe model. Where this conventional method is applied to the wireframe model as illustrated in FIG. 3, for instance, the determination to find closed loops involving the edge L1 should be effected as many as 14 times corresponding to the following 14 closed loops: L1L2L3L4;
L1L2L3L12L8L9; L1L2L3L12L7L6L5L9; L1L2L11L6L5L9; L1L2L11L6L5L8L12L4; L1L2L11L7L8L9, L1L2L11L7L12L4; L1L10L5L9; L1L10L5L8L7L11L3L4; L1L10L5L8L12L4; L1L10L6L7L8L9; L1L10L6L7L12L4; L1L10L6L11L3L4; L1L10L6L11L3L12L8L9. Similar determination should be effected for the edges L2 through L12. Therefore, the total number of operations to find the closed loops according to the conventional method amounts to 12^{14}. In the present embodiment, step SA6 is repeated for the six groups Gi of candidate edges lying on respective six planes, so that the number of determinations that should be effected in steps SB1, SB3 and SB5 is considerably reduced, and the required data processing time is accordingly reduced.
While the presently preferred embodiment of this invention has been described above in detail by reference to the accompanying drawings, it is to be understood that the invention may be otherwise embodied.
In the illustrated embodiment, the candidate edge determining means 40 or step SA3 is adapted determine all groups Gi of candidate edges corresponding to respective planes, before the closedloop edge set determining means 42 or step SA6, SA7 determines whether the candidate edges of each group Gi include the edges defining a closed loop. However, the routine of FIG. 4 may be modified such that the candidate edge determining means 40 or step SA3 and the closedloop edge set determining means 42 are operated or performed alternately so that the determination by the closedloop edge set determining means 42 (in steps SA6, SA7) is followed by the determination of each candidate edge group Gi by the candidate edge determining means 40 (in step SA3). For instance, step SA8 is eliminated, and step SA5 is moved so that step SA7 is followed by step SA5. In this case, the control flow goes back to step SA2 if the negative decision (NO) is obtained in step SA5, so that steps SA2SA7 are repeatedly implemented until the determination by the closedloop edge set determining means 42 has been effected for all candidate edge groups Gi determined by the candidate edge determining means 40.
In the illustrated embodiment, the edge pair pointing means 38 is adapted to sequentially point pairs of edges of the threedimensional wireframe model, in step SA2, and determine in step SA3 whether the two edges of each pointed pair are connected to each other and lie on the same plane. However, the edge pair pointing means 38 may be adapted to sequentially point pairs of two mutually connected edges in step SA2. In this case, step SA3 is not necessary, since the two mutually connected edges of each pair necessarily lie on the same plane. In the illustrated embodiment, there are a total of 66 pairs of edges which are sequentially pointed in step SA2, in the example of FIG. 3. In the modified embodiment indicated above, there are a total of as small as 24 pairs of mutually connected edges.
Further, step SA9 may be eliminated from the routine of FIG. 4, if the routine is applied to a threedimensional wireframe model wherein the candidate edge groups Gi do not have any group whose candidate edges define two or more closed loops.
In the illustrated embodiment, step SA3 is formulated to determine whether the two edges of the pointed pair are connected to each other, as well as whether the two edges lie on the same plane. However, the former determination may be eliminated.
It is to be understood that the present invention may be embodied with various other changes, modifications and improvements, which may occur to those skilled in the art, in the light of the foregoing teaching.
Claims (6)
Priority Applications (2)
Application Number  Priority Date  Filing Date  Title 

JP8201708  19960731  
JP20170896A JP3162630B2 (en)  19960731  19960731  Surface defining the method and apparatus of the wire frame model 
Publications (1)
Publication Number  Publication Date 

US5971583A true US5971583A (en)  19991026 
Family
ID=16445618
Family Applications (1)
Application Number  Title  Priority Date  Filing Date 

US08904427 Expired  Fee Related US5971583A (en)  19960731  19970731  Method and apparatus for defining surfaces of threedimensional object from threedimensional wireframe model 
Country Status (6)
Country  Link 

US (1)  US5971583A (en) 
EP (1)  EP0822522B1 (en) 
JP (1)  JP3162630B2 (en) 
KR (1)  KR100254836B1 (en) 
CA (1)  CA2211887C (en) 
DE (2)  DE69716532D1 (en) 
Cited By (9)
Publication number  Priority date  Publication date  Assignee  Title 

US6230062B1 (en)  19990108  20010508  Voyan Technology  Adaptation to unmeasured variables 
US6259461B1 (en) *  19981014  20010710  Hewlett Packard Company  System and method for accelerating the rendering of graphics in a multipass rendering environment 
US6278898B1 (en) *  19990407  20010821  Voyan Technology  Model error bounds for identification of stochastic models for control design 
US6346949B1 (en) *  19951114  20020212  Minolta Co., Ltd.  Threedimensional form data processor retaining information on color boundaries of an object when thinning coordinate data 
US20030020717A1 (en) *  20010730  20030130  Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba  Device for defining a shape of structural object, method of defining a shape of a structural object, program for defining a shape of a structural object, and device for creating design drawings of a structural object 
US6771818B1 (en) *  20000404  20040803  Microsoft Corporation  System and process for identifying and locating people or objects in a scene by selectively clustering threedimensional regions 
US6819966B1 (en)  20031206  20041116  Paul E. Haeberli  Fabrication of free form structures from planar materials 
US8553939B2 (en)  20090130  20131008  Microsoft Corporation  Pose tracking pipeline 
US8811938B2 (en)  20111216  20140819  Microsoft Corporation  Providing a user interface experience based on inferred vehicle state 
Families Citing this family (4)
Publication number  Priority date  Publication date  Assignee  Title 

EP2811463A8 (en)  20130604  20150218  Dassault Systèmes  Designing a 3d modeled object with 2d views 
EP2874118B1 (en)  20131118  20170802  Dassault Systèmes  Computing camera parameters 
EP3032495A1 (en)  20141210  20160615  Dassault Systèmes  Texturing a 3d modeled object 
EP3188033A1 (en)  20151231  20170705  Dassault Systèmes  Reconstructing a 3d modeled object 
Citations (13)
Publication number  Priority date  Publication date  Assignee  Title 

JPS62251965A (en) *  19860425  19871102  Toshiba Mach Co Ltd  Solid model form defining system in cad/cam system 
US5416893A (en) *  19931026  19950516  HewlettPackard Co.  Method for displaying edging or decaling of an object in a graphics display 
US5475799A (en) *  19880407  19951212  Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.  Method of modeling shapes using a combination of different shapes to represent the resultant shape 
US5481465A (en) *  19921209  19960102  Honda Giken Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha  Method of and system for producing solid models 
JPH0821089A (en) *  19940705  19960123  Masato Sugano  Locking operating tool 
US5579454A (en) *  19910906  19961126  Canon Kabushiki Kaisha  Three dimensional graphics processing with presorting of surface portions 
US5579464A (en) *  19940518  19961126  Sony Corporation  Freeform surface creation method and apparatus thereof 
US5630039A (en) *  19891121  19970513  International Business Machines Corporation  Tessellating complex in polygons in modeling coordinates 
US5655063A (en) *  19940628  19970805  Computervision Corporation  Topology based tolerancing for geometric modeling operations 
US5659493A (en) *  19950303  19970819  Ford Motor Company  Virtual machining techniques for modifying computer models of parts 
US5742291A (en) *  19950509  19980421  Synthonics Incorporated  Method and apparatus for creation of threedimensional wire frames 
US5742288A (en) *  19930806  19980421  Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha  Method of generating or modifying solid model of an object according to crosssectional shapes and a predetermined relationship and apparatus suitable for practicing the method 
US5745117A (en) *  19930726  19980428  International Business Machines Corporation  System and method of creating a threedimensional solid model from a plurality of twodimensional drawings 
Patent Citations (13)
Publication number  Priority date  Publication date  Assignee  Title 

JPS62251965A (en) *  19860425  19871102  Toshiba Mach Co Ltd  Solid model form defining system in cad/cam system 
US5475799A (en) *  19880407  19951212  Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.  Method of modeling shapes using a combination of different shapes to represent the resultant shape 
US5630039A (en) *  19891121  19970513  International Business Machines Corporation  Tessellating complex in polygons in modeling coordinates 
US5579454A (en) *  19910906  19961126  Canon Kabushiki Kaisha  Three dimensional graphics processing with presorting of surface portions 
US5481465A (en) *  19921209  19960102  Honda Giken Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha  Method of and system for producing solid models 
US5745117A (en) *  19930726  19980428  International Business Machines Corporation  System and method of creating a threedimensional solid model from a plurality of twodimensional drawings 
US5742288A (en) *  19930806  19980421  Toyota Jidosha Kabushiki Kaisha  Method of generating or modifying solid model of an object according to crosssectional shapes and a predetermined relationship and apparatus suitable for practicing the method 
US5416893A (en) *  19931026  19950516  HewlettPackard Co.  Method for displaying edging or decaling of an object in a graphics display 
US5579464A (en) *  19940518  19961126  Sony Corporation  Freeform surface creation method and apparatus thereof 
US5655063A (en) *  19940628  19970805  Computervision Corporation  Topology based tolerancing for geometric modeling operations 
JPH0821089A (en) *  19940705  19960123  Masato Sugano  Locking operating tool 
US5659493A (en) *  19950303  19970819  Ford Motor Company  Virtual machining techniques for modifying computer models of parts 
US5742291A (en) *  19950509  19980421  Synthonics Incorporated  Method and apparatus for creation of threedimensional wire frames 
NonPatent Citations (6)
Title 

Alfred Van Kempen, et al., Automation in Construction, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 7 to 13, "Design Modelling", May 1, 1992. 
Alfred Van Kempen, et al., Automation in Construction, vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 7 to 13, Design Modelling , May 1, 1992. * 
IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 33, No. 12, pp. 466 and 467, "Collection of Edges into Polygons in Fast Drawing System", May 1, 1991. 
IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 33, No. 12, pp. 466 and 467, Collection of Edges into Polygons in Fast Drawing System , May 1, 1991. * 
Pramod N. Chivate, et al., Computer Aided Design, vol. 25, No. 9, pp. 587 to 600, Solid Model Generation From Measured Point Data , Sep. 1, 1993. * 
Pramod N. Chivate, et al., ComputerAided Design, vol. 25, No. 9, pp. 587 to 600, "SolidModel Generation From Measured Point Data", Sep. 1, 1993. 
Cited By (16)
Publication number  Priority date  Publication date  Assignee  Title 

US6346949B1 (en) *  19951114  20020212  Minolta Co., Ltd.  Threedimensional form data processor retaining information on color boundaries of an object when thinning coordinate data 
US6259461B1 (en) *  19981014  20010710  Hewlett Packard Company  System and method for accelerating the rendering of graphics in a multipass rendering environment 
US6230062B1 (en)  19990108  20010508  Voyan Technology  Adaptation to unmeasured variables 
US6404581B1 (en)  19990108  20020611  Voyan Technology  Adaptation to unmeasured variables 
US6745087B2 (en)  19990108  20040601  Tokyo Electron Limited  Method for control of a plant 
US6278898B1 (en) *  19990407  20010821  Voyan Technology  Model error bounds for identification of stochastic models for control design 
US6771818B1 (en) *  20000404  20040803  Microsoft Corporation  System and process for identifying and locating people or objects in a scene by selectively clustering threedimensional regions 
US20030020717A1 (en) *  20010730  20030130  Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba  Device for defining a shape of structural object, method of defining a shape of a structural object, program for defining a shape of a structural object, and device for creating design drawings of a structural object 
US6819966B1 (en)  20031206  20041116  Paul E. Haeberli  Fabrication of free form structures from planar materials 
US8553939B2 (en)  20090130  20131008  Microsoft Corporation  Pose tracking pipeline 
US8565485B2 (en)  20090130  20131022  Microsoft Corporation  Pose tracking pipeline 
US8610665B2 (en)  20090130  20131217  Microsoft Corporation  Pose tracking pipeline 
US8860663B2 (en)  20090130  20141014  Microsoft Corporation  Pose tracking pipeline 
US9465980B2 (en)  20090130  20161011  Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc  Pose tracking pipeline 
US8811938B2 (en)  20111216  20140819  Microsoft Corporation  Providing a user interface experience based on inferred vehicle state 
US9596643B2 (en)  20111216  20170314  Microsoft Technology Licensing, Llc  Providing a user interface experience based on inferred vehicle state 
Also Published As
Publication number  Publication date  Type 

DE69716532T2 (en)  20030626  grant 
EP0822522B1 (en)  20021023  grant 
KR100254836B1 (en)  20000501  grant 
JP3162630B2 (en)  20010508  grant 
EP0822522A2 (en)  19980204  application 
CA2211887C (en)  20011009  grant 
EP0822522A3 (en)  19980819  application 
DE69716532D1 (en)  20021128  grant 
CA2211887A1 (en)  19980131  application 
JPH1049708A (en)  19980220  application 
Similar Documents
Publication  Publication Date  Title 

Montazeri et al.  Analysis of scheduling rules for an FMS  
Shafer et al.  A goal programming approach to the cell formation problem  
US5923573A (en)  Threedimensional CAD system for producing a threedimensional model  
US5892691A (en)  Method, apparatus, and software product for generating weighted deformations for geometric models  
US6449761B1 (en)  Method and apparatus for providing multiple electronic design solutions  
US4858150A (en)  Shape modeling system  
Giles et al.  Advanced interactive visualization for CFD  
Buzacott  " Optimal" operating rules for automated manufacturing systems  
US5379371A (en)  Displaying method and apparatus for threedimensional computer graphics  
US6490498B1 (en)  Integrated support system for supporting sheet metal machining  
US7292908B2 (en)  Systems and methods for manufacturing customized prefabricated buildings including arbitrarily modularizing a building specification without using any predefined modules  
US20040145614A1 (en)  Building production information integration system  
Yamaguchi  Curves and surfaces in computer aided geometric design  
US5016170A (en)  Task management  
Hillyard et al.  Characterizing nonideal shapes in terms of dimensions and tolerances  
US5371689A (en)  Method of measuring cumulative processing time for modules required in process to be traced  
US4912657A (en)  Method and systems for generating parametric designs  
US5870099A (en)  Method of supporting perspective projection  
US5197120A (en)  Methods and systems for generating parametric designs  
US5734383A (en)  Apparatus and method for generating a threedimensional model on a graphic display from a twodimensional image  
Johnson  A framework for reducing manufacturing throughput time  
Borghesani et al.  The QFT Frequency domain control design toolbox  
US20030045947A1 (en)  System, method and computer program product for controlling the operation of motion devices by directly implementing electronic simulation information  
Park  A methodology for creating a virtual model for a flexible manufacturing system  
US4891763A (en)  NC program editing and programming device 
Legal Events
Date  Code  Title  Description 

AS  Assignment 
Owner name: B P A INC., JAPAN Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:OHNISHI, AKIHIRO;NAKAMURA, HISANORI;SAKAI, HIROHISA;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:008981/0954 Effective date: 19970808 Owner name: TOYOTA JIDOSHA KABUSHIKI KAISHA, JAPAN Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:OHNISHI, AKIHIRO;NAKAMURA, HISANORI;SAKAI, HIROHISA;AND OTHERS;REEL/FRAME:008981/0954 Effective date: 19970808 

FPAY  Fee payment 
Year of fee payment: 4 

REMI  Maintenance fee reminder mailed  
LAPS  Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees  
FP  Expired due to failure to pay maintenance fee 
Effective date: 20071026 